Cited by 124Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Software Testing and Debugging TechniquesAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

EXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)—From Theory to Methods and Applications

Open access
Ortigossa, Evandro S., Gonçalves, Thales, Nonato, Luis Gustavo·2024·IEEE Access

Abstract

Intelligent applications supported by Machine Learning have achieved remarkable performance rates for a wide range of tasks in many domains. However, understanding why a trained algorithm makes a particular decision remains problematic. Given the growing interest in the application of learning-based models, some concerns arise in the dealing with sensible environments, which may impact users’ lives. The complex nature of those models’ decision mechanisms makes them the so-called “black boxes,” in which the understanding of the logic behind automated decision-making processes by humans is not trivial. Furthermore, the reasoning that leads a model to provide a specific prediction can be more important than performance metrics, which introduces a trade-off between interpretability and model accuracy. Explaining intelligent computer decisions can be regarded as a way to justify their reliability and establish trust. In this sense, explanations are critical tools that verify predictions to discover errors and biases previously hidden within the models’ complex structures, opening up vast possibilities for more responsible applications. In this review, we provide theoretical foundations of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), clarifying diffuse definitions and identifying research objectives, challenges, and future research lines related to turning opaque machine learning outputs into more transparent decisions. We also present a careful overview of the state-of-the-art explainability approaches, with a particular analysis of methods based on feature importance, such as the well-known LIME and SHAP. As a result, we highlight practical applications of the successful use of XAI.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2024.3409843

Cites

245 of 245 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Ortigossa et al. (2024) emphasize that incorporating practitioner perspectives is vital to ensure that explanations align with real-world needs and cognitive workflows.

    “Ortigossa et al. (2024) emphasize that incorporating practitioner perspectives is vital to ensure that explanations align with real-world needs and cognitive workflows.”

    From Explainable AI: enhancing decision-making in the detection of cyber threats (2026) · cites this paper as Ortigossa et al. (2024)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ortigossa, E. S., Gonçalves, T., & Nonato, L. G.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of São Paulo (ICMC-USP), São Carlos, Brazil
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2024
Volume
12
Pages
80799-80846
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399449888
Cited by
124
References
245
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 6
FWCI
18.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior–Brasil (CAPES)–Finance Code 001
  • São Paulo Research Foundation
  • National Council for Scientific and Technological Development
  • Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (2018/24516-0, 2022/09091-8)
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (307184/2021-8)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
explainable AI, model interpretability, black-box models, automated decision-making, trust in machine learning, feature importance, lime, SHAP, model transparency, algorithmic bias detection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review